VFacts Feb 2024

[DFB FGXR6]

Originally Posted by Sprintey

We brought up the CX60 in a previous Vfacts, here's a news update on it's suspension and transmission tune:

https://www.carexpert.com.au/car-new...suspension-fix

This is somewhat strange for Mazda, in the past chassis and powertrain calibration prowess was a given. I guess without the Ford partnership splitting development costs, the finer details are getting overlooked.

[Dr Smith]

Originally Posted by DFB FGXR6

This is somewhat strange for Mazda, in the past chassis and powertrain calibration prowess was a given. I guess without the Ford partnership splitting development costs, the finer details are getting overlooked.

I wonder what the cost differences are between say taking an off-the shelf and very highly regarded ZF 8 speed TC-auto vs the costs of developing this setup in house plus all the negative press.

I find it odd that Mazda thought it was OK to release these vehicles considering part of their aim with the new rwd-biased platform for it's CX-x0 models was to go upmarket in perception and obviously price. Ride quality and powertrain smoothness/quietness are just given requirements in this area.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Dr Smith

I wonder what the cost differences are between say taking an off-the shelf and very highly regarded ZF 8 speed TC-auto vs the costs of developing this setup in house plus all the negative press.

I find it odd that Mazda thought it was OK to release these vehicles considering part of their aim with the new rwd-biased platform for it's CX-x0 models was to go upmarket in perception and obviously price. Ride quality and powertrain smoothness/quietness are just given requirements in this area.

Shades of a an originally good idea about bringing back multiple I-6 RWD vehicles
that’s been progressively scaled back because Euro brands didn’t launch as expected.

We’re possibly looking at a replacement for the CX-7 later this year and the CX-60 caught my eye
but honestly, all we need is the CX-8 and the location of the Cx-60 timing belt worries me.
The CX-60 reminds me of a misbegotten BMW with equally costly post warranty issues.
I can’t take the chance, so that’s a no from me.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by DFB FGXR6

This is somewhat strange for Mazda, in the past chassis and powertrain calibration prowess was a given. I guess without the Ford partnership splitting development costs, the finer details are getting overlooked.

Post 'zoom-zoom' era Mazda are a joke, they're on the trajectory of Honda, which was another great auto manufacturer who drank the koolaid and tried to emulate white goods pioneer, Toyota but badly failed.

As far as their sketchy in house developed transmission is, typical engineers trying to reinvent the wheel and fix something there's no problems with, should have just used the 8sp ZF box and be done with it.

[ToryMikey]

Originally Posted by Franco Cozzo

Post 'zoom-zoom' era Mazda are a joke, they're on the trajectory of Honda, which was another great auto manufacturer who drank the koolaid and tried to emulate white goods pioneer, Toyota but badly failed.

As far as their sketchy in house developed transmission is, typical engineers trying to reinvent the wheel and fix something there's no problems with, should have just used the 8sp ZF box and be done with it.

Mazda tried to have it both ways. Deliver less and charge more. It's like a shrinkflated supermarket product going up in price.

In retrospect the ND MX-5 was really the first symptom of this, no attention paid to steering calibration at all, in a car that is meant to be all about the handling. Really big backwards step over the NC in all areas except kerb weight.

For what Mazda are charging it's hard not to justify stretching to a BMW.

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by DFB FGXR6

This is somewhat strange for Mazda, in the past chassis and powertrain calibration prowess was a given. I guess without the Ford partnership splitting development costs, the finer details are getting overlooked.

I don't remember Ford offering fixes on the 10 speed auto changes on the previous ranger. I know that was constantly bagged by the reviewers.

[DFB FGXR6]

Originally Posted by vztrt

I don't remember Ford offering fixes on the 10 speed auto changes on the previous ranger. I know that was constantly bagged by the reviewers.

Correct.

My comments were in line with shared development costs between Mazda and Ford. While Mazda is big in Australia, the brand doesn't have the same presence in other markets, the USA in particular. Being a relatively small brand means they have less resources to play with.

This is where the Ford partnership allowed Mazda to share the expensive items like platforms and powertrains, in turn allowing Mazda to spend money on the finer details like chassis prowess and feel, engine tuning and sound, flamboyant styling, quality interiors ect. Without Ford co-development, Mazda have to spend money differently in developing models from scratch.

I'm not saying new Mazda's are crap, their interiors are simply brilliant for the price, and I love that they decided to pursue RWD platforms and inline 6 engines. However, in certain respects Mazda have moved in a different direction or even backwards. Things like chassis and steering tuning, which had previously been their hallmark. The budget constraints and customers wanting less road noise and ride harshness have led Mazda to chase a wider audience, while compromising what made them great.

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by DFB FGXR6

Correct.

My comments were in line with shared development costs between Mazda and Ford. While Mazda is big in Australia, the brand doesn't have the same presence in other markets, the USA in particular. Being a relatively small brand means they have less resources to play with.

This is where the Ford partnership allowed Mazda to share the expensive items like platforms and powertrains, in turn allowing Mazda to spend money on the finer details like chassis prowess and feel, engine tuning and sound, flamboyant styling, quality interiors ect. Without Ford co-development, Mazda have to spend money differently in developing models from scratch.

I'm not saying new Mazda's are crap, their interiors are simply brilliant for the price, and I love that they decided to pursue RWD platforms and inline 6 engines. However, in certain respects Mazda have moved in a different direction or even backwards. Things like chassis and steering tuning, which had previously been their hallmark. The budget constraints and customers wanting less road noise and ride harshness have led Mazda to chase a wider audience, while compromising what made them great.

The two items in question seem to be more hyped up than it seems.
The auto issue is at really low speeds and if you have better pedal control the issue isn't there. But considering it's not a manual vehicle the update is a good idea as pedal control seems difficult for people who have only driven auto's all their life. If you punch this car it's extremely smooth and quick.

The suspension gripe, in all seriousness it's not something I've noticed. Coming from a Falcon with 19's it was nice and it rides better than the Territory. The only thing I could think the issue is that the rear could bounce harder going over speed bumps.

I've got a bigger gripe with the car....but otherwise it's got good power and it's nice to drive.

[Dr Smith]

Originally Posted by vztrt

I don't remember Ford offering fixes on the 10 speed auto changes on the previous ranger. I know that was constantly bagged by the reviewers.

I thought the early Ford 10 speeds were criticised for constantly shifting up and down or were they clunky/jerky in slow and stop start traffic like all "DSG-type boxes"?

[DFB FGXR6]

Originally Posted by Dr Smith

I thought the early Ford 10 speeds were criticised for constantly shifting up and down or were they clunky/jerky in slow and stop start traffic like all "DSG-type boxes"?

The earliest 10-speed's delivered in Australia were on PX MK II Ranger's with the Bi-Turbo. From what I could tell at the time, you would get the occasional poorly timed shift, which would cause the odd clunky up shift.

The earlier gear skipping calibration also caused some weird up shifts, especially the 1st to 3rd and 3rd to 5th under light throttle driving. Future updates smoothed that out.

On the latest Ranger's, the 10-speed now shift sequentially, even on light throttle acceleration. While this means it shifts more often, each change is smoother. To me, this feels more natural.

On 10-speed Mustang's, Ford engineered a pronounced gearshift thump in Sport+ and Track modes, so firm that it will chirp the rears on upshift. If you are used to syrupy smooth torque converter autos, that firmness would be quite disconcerting.

What I find most annoying about the 10-speed, and it seems to be common to all 10-speeds from an Explorer to an F-150 to a Ranger to a Mustang, is that manual inputs have too much delay and that it will automatically upshift at redline. That delay combined with the auto upshift can sometimes cause an accidental double upshift. On a Ranger or Explorer, that is not going to be an issue for most, on a Mustang it's unacceptable.